Arendale v. Balkamp, Inc., et al.
| Docket Number: | 2001-WC-01762-COA Linked Case(s): 2001-CT-01762-COA ; 2001-CT-01762-SCT ; 2001-WC-01762-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-30-2003 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Workers’ compensation - Scheduled member injury - Loss of wage-earning capacity Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WORKERS' COMPENSATION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-24-2001 Appealed from: Leflore County Circuit Court Judge: Richard Smith Disposition: FINDINGS OF THE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION AFFIRMED Case Number: 2001 018 CI |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | James C. Arendale |
CHARLIE BAGLAN
LAWRENCE J. HAKIM |
||
| Appellee: | Balkamp, Inc. and The Travelers Insurance Company | FRANKLIN WILLIAMS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Workers’ compensation - Scheduled member injury - Loss of wage-earning capacity |
| Summary of the Facts: | James Arendale was engaged in shipping-related duties for his employer, Balkamp, Inc., when he suffered an injury. The Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission awarded Arendale benefits for a work-related permanent partial disability found to have adversely impacted his ability to earn wages. The circuit court affirmed, and Arendale appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Scheduled member injury Arendale argues that, because the Commission determined that he had suffered permanent medical impairment to a scheduled member, the Commission erred in failing to base his compensation on the “scheduled member” provisions of section 71-3-17(c). The measure of compensation for a scheduled member injury is the greater of the percentage of the functional loss of use, generally dependent on medical proof, or industrial loss of use which factors in the ability of the claimant to perform the customary acts of his usual employment. Here, there was no proof indicating some identifiable medical problem with either of Arendale’s arms, but most of the medical treatment related to upper body and neck pain. The mere fact that Arendale’s use of his upper extremities acts as a triggering mechanism for the disabling pain he experiences in his neck, shoulders, and upper back does not transform his claim into a scheduled member injury. Issue 2: Loss of wage-earning capacity Arendale argues that the Commission erred in assessing his percentage of loss of wage-earning capacity at only twenty percent. His argument is based on his earlier issue, i.e., that he has suffered scheduled member injuries to both upper extremities. Because his argument depends for its validity on the foundational premise that this is a scheduled member case which, in fact, it is not, this issue is without merit. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
